I've been internet-window shopping cars for the future and certainly cars like the M3/M5 (535i seems more practical alternative), a S4/RS4, a E55/63 AMG have been on my list of future attinable dream cars...

But are Bimmers easy for DIY jobs in your experience? I know parts are obviously more but hoping to save on labor.

I mean I know that most of these guys are probably rich dudes who sees $300 oil changes as chump change so they just take it to the dealer with a blanket check.

On a couple Benz/Audi forum(MBworld, Audizine) I did not seem to see nearly as much DIY threads/repair yourself threads as compared to Azine.

I've read somewhere else that there are two types of BMW owners: super rich dudes who has F U money and gets them serviced/fixed at dealers all the time and gets new leases every few years......and budget dudes who work on old ass BMWs on their driveways all on their own..... (of course im sure many are in between these two extremes)

I'm going to say "No" to your question. These things are rolling computers. I wouldn't do any of my own wrenching, but then I haven't done that in quite a while anyway. I know I wouldn't have messed with any kind of work under the hood on my M5. Aside from the fact that there was ZERO room under there (V10, small space), I just didn't want to take the chance of doing anything that could harm that thing. A rebuilt S85 motor for the E60 M5 is $30k. No thanks. If a shop messes it up, that's on them.

I'm going to say "No" to your question. These things are rolling computers. I wouldn't do any of my own wrenching, but then I haven't done that in quite a while anyway. I know I wouldn't have messed with any kind of work under the hood on my M5. Aside from the fact that there was ZERO room under there (V10, small space), I just didn't want to take the chance of doing anything that could harm that thing. A rebuilt S85 motor for the E60 M5 is $30k. No thanks. If a shop messes it up, that's on them.

Dang...guess that makes sense.

Well looks like I'll have to be fully prepared for all the costs of jumping into german performance cars before actually doing so.

You know, guys like Saintor may get butthurt about Consumer Reports writing articles like this and may think CR is dumb and biased and ungrounded and unfair and but ultimately, people do listen to CR. And people rely on their testing.

Ultimately, whether or not he wants to believe its true or not, Acura has a lot to lose

Poor FCA, I thought their quality had improved after their 2009 restructure?

I think everyone knew Land Rover was terrible for reliability.

They have for a large part. I now have 10k miles on my Jeep and haven't had any issues at all.

The ZF 9AT had a lot of teething issues early on (the TLX and MDX shared the same issues) but those were software issues that have since been resolved and 2015+ models have been just fine.

Also, remember that a lot of reported "issues" are in regards to concerns with the infotainment system. If someone comes in needing a software update for the infotainment system, that's considered an "issue". This is what sways reliability metrics the way they are calculated now and why you find models that have very involved and integrated infotainment systems higher up the list than those that don't.

You know, guys like Saintor may get butthurt about Consumer Reports writing articles like this and may think CR is dumb and biased and ungrounded and unfair and but ultimately, people do listen to CR. And people rely on their testing.

Ultimately, whether or not he wants to believe its true or not, Acura has a lot to lose

lol so this is why Jeep continues to break sales records and hold large market share?

They have for a large part. I now have 10k miles on my Jeep and haven't had any issues at all.

The ZF 9AT had a lot of teething issues early on (the TLX and MDX shared the same issues) but those were software issues that have since been resolved and 2015+ models have been just fine.

Also, remember that a lot of reported "issues" are in regards to concerns with the infotainment system. If someone comes in needing a software update for the infotainment system, that's considered an "issue". This is what sways reliability metrics the way they are calculated now and why you find models that have very involved and integrated infotainment systems higher up the list than those that don't.

That's kind of been an ongoing problem for few years for several manufacturers. I recall Ford got hammered in the "Initial Quality" surveys because of "MyFordSync" (or whatever it's called). It almost seems like they ought to segregate the quality assessments between mechanical and digital to get a better picture of what consumers are really dealing with.

An article about how "reliability" data is interpreted just went up on autoblog, it's a good read:

Quote:

JD Power's 2016 Vehicle Dependability Study is out, and, for the fifth straight year, Lexus is at the top of the rankings. I'm not shocked. In fact, I fully expect that new-car shoppers who buy a brand-new Lexus in 2016 will end up with a car that gives them very little to complain about. I could say the same for Porsche, which landed itself in second place.

But here's where things get murky. Sitting way down in 23rd is Subaru, followed by Scion. These too are automotive brands that I'd have no qualms recommending to buyers, depending on what that buyer is looking for (though Scion is on its way out, its vehicles will be sold as Toyota models starting in August of 2016). And the same can be said of Mazda, which languishes in 21st, just ahead of Chrysler. Why are these generally well-liked makers of reliable automobiles so far down in JD Power's Dependability Study? The answer, unfortunately, is that they don't have very good infotainment systems.

According to JD Power, its study consists of "owner-reported problems during the past 12 months by original owners of three-year-old vehicles." So this latest report focuses on vehicles from the 2013 model year, which makes sense. But here's where the problems come in: "Symptoms are evaluated in eight vehicle system categories including: exterior; features/controls/displays; seats; interior; the driving experience; audio/entertainment/navigation; heating, ventilation and cooling; and engine/transmission."

Individual scores from each of these eight categories count toward a final all-encompassing score, and it's presented as problems per 100 vehicles. This year, the industry average was 152 problems per 100 vehicles, which is a few percentage points behind the average from last year. So, it would seem cars somehow got less reliable from 2012 to 2013.

Here's the problem: That's not true.

Says JD Power's press release: "The number of engine/transmission problems decreases to 24 PP100 in 2016 from 26 PP100 in 2015." Put simply, owners of 2013 model-year vehicles report fewer of the kinds of problems that keep cars stuck on tow trucks. Which is kinda the definition of dependability. So, why are the overall numbers getting worse?
Among owners who experienced a Bluetooth pairing/connectivity problem, 53% said the vehicle didn't find/recognize their mobile phone/device.
Among owners who indicate having experienced a voice recognition problem, 67% say the problem was related to the system not recognizing/misinterpreting verbal commands.

Now we get a sense of the problem. If an owner can't get his or her phone to connect via Bluetooth to the audio system, that's a problem. If an owner's audible command isn't properly deciphered by that annoying synthesized voice all infotainment systems seem plagued by, that's a problem. But are either of those problems as serious as a transmission that won't shift, or an engine that won't start? Not by my standards. But by JD Power's, the answer is yes.

JD Power rationalizes this discrepancy by saying that vehicle faults – such as a broken engine or transmission – can be fixed, while poorly designed user interfaces will irritate the consumer for the life of the vehicle. That may be true, but this isn't a Vehicle Irritation Study, it's a Vehicle Dependability Study. And a dependable vehicle is a vehicle that doesn't leave you stranded.

The moral of the story is this: Until the eight categories that make up JD Power's Vehicle Dependability Study get some sort of meaningful weighted rank, they need to be taken with a grain of salt.

I'm going to side with JD Powers on this one and say that yes, a bad infotainment system is a huge fucking headache and a nightmare to own, especially when you're dropping a shit ton of money on something you expect to work.

While no, it won't leave you stranded, it makes owning that vehicle unbearable at times. It just fucking sucks. I wouldn't recommend something like that, say, to my parents. "Oh, this car is awesome, but don't bother using half the features you're paying for, because it's not worth it". Um, no.

Another example- I would be hard pressed to buy a car without Bluetooth these days. Not because I feel I need it, but because society as a whole thinks it's evil to look at your phone when sitting stopped at a red light, due to some fucking dummies who ruin it for everyone else. Now if my Bluetooth didn't work, you'd better believe I'd be pissed.

lol so this is why Jeep continues to break sales records and hold large market share?

Quote:

Originally Posted by SamDoe1

lol so this is why Jeep continues to break sales records and hold large market share?

I don't think it's a one-size-fits-all scenario. Jeeps have always sold pretty well and I think their history and off-road capability puts them in a category that others don't necessarily venture into much, especially at some of the low price points that jeep can hit. I can't think of anyone else who's in the same market segment as jeep, besides for maybe the GC, being a luxury unit above anything else.

I'm also not saying that everyone who reads this says "OMG, I CANT BUY THAT NOW!", but I'm sure some do. And to be honest, the only reason I won't even bat an eye at dodge/Chrysler/jeep is due to knowing their shit reliability. While I do hear of good ownership stories, I've seen my parents, friends, and parents of friends have shitty experiences with FCA products. Not every product. But it happens. Sure there's a chance I may have a great ownership experience- I won't deny that. But I'm also not willing to put my money on the line to find out.

I'm not much of a risk taker, unless it's a calculated risk in which I feel I won't get fucked on all too badly. Maybe that's the problem. I dunno. Either way...

I'm going to side with JD Powers on this one and say that yes, a bad infotainment system is a huge fucking headache and a nightmare to own, especially when you're dropping a shit ton of money on something you expect to work.

While no, it won't leave you stranded, it makes owning that vehicle unbearable at times. It just fucking sucks. I wouldn't recommend something like that, say, to my parents. "Oh, this car is awesome, but don't bother using half the features you're paying for, because it's not worth it". Um, no.

Another example- I would be hard pressed to buy a car without Bluetooth these days. Not because I feel I need it, but because society as a whole thinks it's evil to look at your phone when sitting stopped at a red light, due to some fucking dummies who ruin it for everyone else. Now if my Bluetooth didn't work, you'd better believe I'd be pissed.

Is it a problem? Yes. Would I get it fixed? Absolutely. Is it on the same magnitude as my engine/trans blew up and it left me on the side of the road in the middle of nowhere? No.

I wouldn't say to toss out those issues from the survey but weight them according to how big of an issue it actually is.

Quote:

Originally Posted by TacoBello

I don't think it's a one-size-fits-all scenario. Jeeps have always sold pretty well and I think their history and off-road capability puts them in a category that others don't necessarily venture into much, especially at some of the low price points that jeep can hit. I can't think of anyone else who's in the same market segment as jeep, besides for maybe the GC, being a luxury unit above anything else.

I'm also not saying that everyone who reads this says "OMG, I CANT BUY THAT NOW!", but I'm sure some do. And to be honest, the only reason I won't even bat an eye at dodge/Chrysler/jeep is due to knowing their shit reliability. While I do hear of good ownership stories, I've seen my parents, friends, and parents of friends have shitty experiences with FCA products. Not every product. But it happens. Sure there's a chance I may have a great ownership experience- I won't deny that. But I'm also not willing to put my money on the line to find out.

I'm not much of a risk taker, unless it's a calculated risk in which I feel I won't get fucked on all too badly. Maybe that's the problem. I dunno. Either way...

Mopar lifetime warranty FTW. Allows you to enjoy the car for what it's meant to do for a very long time at a low cost ($2300 for my Cherokee) with a warranty backed by Chrysler for as long as you own the car.

Anecdotally, I've owned cars and have an opinion. Some people agree with me and others do not. Other people that have owned cars have an opinion and I agree with some of them but not others.

Anyone who thinks in a similar manner as I do is intelligent (and likely handsome or beautiful). Anyone with a dissimilar manner of thinking is an ugly idiot (and likely a gigantic asshole with personal grooming issues).

Worthless redneck. So is the other monkey with his portrait and the other one with his avatar, obviously ready to suck something. So little time, so many dummies.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Taco

What's funny is this guy thinks Acuras are still reliable these days
...
You know, guys like Saintor may get butthurt about Consumer Reports writing articles like this and may think CR is dumb and biased and ungrounded and unfair and but ultimately, people do listen to CR. And people rely on their testing.

Acura are still very reliable overall. Saying otherwise just shows once more your utter ignorance. Go Trump go!

You really, REALLY think that Volvo and Mini are better overall than Mercedes?

Our rankings reveal the automakers that produce reliable, high-performing models and those that don't

By Consumer Reports
Last updated: February 21, 2019

Subaru tops our brand rankings chart this year for the first time, jumping up six spots and knocking last year's No. 1—Genesis—off its perch. This impressive performance was boosted by the Ascent (an all-new model), Crosstrek, and Forester SUVs sitting atop their respective categories. While BMW and Porsche have higher average road-test scores, Subaru’s strong predicted reliability and owner satisfaction marks drove it to the head of the pack. The brand’s lone blemish is the much-below-average predicted reliability for the sporty WRX sedan.

Mini was the most upwardly mobile brand this year, gaining 10 spots thanks to improved reliability. Lincoln rose nine places in part because of the brand’s stronger reliability, especially for the Continental sedan.

Chrysler and Tesla sank the most, each falling 11 spots. (The brand score of automakers with limited lineups can be hit hard by even a small change with one model.) Chrysler was hurt by reports from owners about problems with the in-car electronics and transmissions in both the
300 sedan and Pacifica minivan.

Reliability was also an issue for Tesla, which was dragged down as the Model 3 dropped from average to below-average reliability. Model 3 owners told us that problem areas included loose body trim and glass defects.

You know, I am on my second Volvo and second Subaru. Both have been beyond reliable. The biggest issue with my current Volvo was the AC compressor biting the dust. That was an expensive repair ($1600) ~80K miles on the clock. Other than that, very reliable. Both Subaru's, not a thing to complain about. I could be just getting some good lots?

We bought a Subaru for exactly this reason. My wife doesn't like to switch out cars unless there's a compelling reason to do so and having a dead reliable car with good resale value was high on her list of desires.